City of Inglewood received their first Honda Hybrid Civic which will increase fuel economy, reduce maintenance cost and keep the City in compliance with the state of California’s zero-emissions mandate. This type of technology helps to reduce our dependence on foreign oils. Click  here to read more.




Oil Life System

Let's see, my last oil change was about three months ago; or no, it was 2,700 miles ago, I think. Where did that windshield reminder sticker go? Relax. Engineers have introduced technology designed to help those of us who have trouble keeping track of exactly when the last oil change was. And it can help save time and money, while helping protect the environment by reducing waste. The GM Oil Life System is already included on many new GM vehicles and the number is constantly increasing.

The Oil Life System serves as an electronic reminder that constantly calculates oil life based on a number of variables. The factors taken into account include: engine speed, operating temperature, load or rpm variance, and period of operation at any given load and temperature. The idea is to recommend an oil and filter change when it's actually needed, rather than by some predetermined interval.

Based on driving conditions, the mileage at which an oil change will be indicated can vary considerably. Remember, for the oil life system to work properly, it must be reset every time the oil is changed.
The oil change reminder will not detect dusty conditions or engine malfunctions that may affect the oil. Also, the oil monitor does not measure how much oil is in the engine. So be sure to check the oil level and condition on a regular basis.

With the Oil Life System, there's no need to adhere to the old adage of changing your oil every three months or 3,000 miles, whichever comes first, unless you forget to reset the system or you live in an unusually dusty environment.

If you change your oil on the "old schedule" that could easily be four or five oil changes a year. At an average of $25 per change, even if the system only eliminates two of those changes, that's $50 per year multiplied over the life of your vehicle. Not to mention the time saved and inconvenience avoided.

Also, by reducing the number of oil changes, you'll be helping the environment by limiting the amount of engine oil that is used as well as the amount of oil that needs to be discarded properly.

For drivers who may not use their vehicles often, the oil life system may not indicate that an oil change is needed for over a year. However, GM service recommends that you have your oil and filter changed once a year and reset the oil life system at each change. If you don't reset the system, your reminder light may stay on.

To find out more about the GM Oil Life System, consult your Owner Manual. Remember, there are Owner Manuals available online at mygmlink.com. If you have any other questions regarding the oil life system, phone or visit your GM dealership service center.

Steering Toward Rollover Prevention

Cars and SUVs with electronic stability control are about half as likely to be involved in fatal single-vehicle crashes, a study finds.

WASHINGTON — The number of deadly vehicle rollover crashes could be dramatically reduced by an invention that has won popularity in Europe but is not widely known in the United States, a study to be released today indicates.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety studied U.S. accident data and found that vehicles with electronic stability control as standard equipment were only about half as likely to be involved in fatal single-vehicle crashes as identical models without the technology. Although many drivers fear colliding with another vehicle, single-vehicle accidents are statistically the most common type of fatal crash. Rollovers account for about half of the deaths of drivers and passengers in single-vehicle crashes.

Researchers estimated that more than 7,000 lives could be saved each year if all vehicles on U.S. roads had stability control. Last year, 42,643 people died in traffic accidents.

"In terms of effectiveness, I think it compares favorably to things like seat belts and side air bags," said Susan Ferguson, senior vice president for research at the institute, a safety advocacy organization based in Arlington, Virginia.

However, the study found that the technology had little or no effect on reducing the risk of crashes involving two or more vehicles.

Nonetheless, stability control represents a new stage of development for automobile safety systems, Ferguson said.

"Seat belts and air bags are crash-worthiness technologies — if you get in a crash, they will help you survive it," she said. "What electronic stability control does is help you avoid the crash in the first place."

Stability control systems constantly monitor whether a vehicle is traveling in the direction in which the driver is steering. If sensors detect a deviation, as in a skid, a small onboard computer takes over. It quickly applies the brake to an individual wheel for an instant to get the vehicle back on track. The computer can also reduce engine power.

"The driver doesn't have to do much, other than ride it out," Ferguson said.

The systems cost about $300 to $500 and are starting to be installed in some sport utility vehicles and luxury cars. They work in tandem with antilock brakes.

The institute's study involved several 2000-2001 SUV and car models, including the Toyota 4Runner and the BMW Z3 roadster. Researchers analyzed crashes reported to police in seven states in 2000 and 2001.

The most noticeable benefits of stability control would likely come from preventing rollover crashes that involve SUVs. However, drivers and passengers in all types of vehicles would gain additional protection. For example, stability control could prevent a passenger car from leaving the road and striking a tree.

In Europe, stability control is built into about half of the new vehicles sold, compared with about 10% in the U.S., according to one system manufacturer. German and Swedish car makers were early converts to the technology and were more likely to offer it as standard equipment.

Though stability control is available on an increasing number of vehicles sold in the U.S., it is usually offered as optional equipment. For example, the 2005 Ford Explorer has the technology as standard equipment, but it is optional on Ford's larger Excursion.

Lack of awareness about the benefits of the technology may explain why U.S. consumers have not embraced it, experts said.

American car buyers may also be confused by the array of brand names that manufacturers use for their versions of the technology. "When you go into the showroom, they all have different names," Ferguson said. Ford calls its system Advance Trac, and General Motors uses several brand names, including StabiliTrak, Active Handling and Precision Control. Toyota calls it Vehicle Stability Control and Mercedes-Benz uses ESP, or Electronic Stability Program.

"It would be nice if we could all agree to call it electronic stability control," Ferguson said. "A single way of referring to it would help to educate the public."

Studies by the federal government have found potentially dramatic benefits from stability control. In preliminary findings released last month, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said the technology reduced fatal single-vehicle crashes by 63% in SUVs and by 30% in passenger cars.

The agency is conducting more tests on the technology, and has not decided whether to propose regulations that would require automakers to install the systems.

"We may look at rule-making in the future, but we feel we need more research first," said NHTSA spokesman Rae Tyson. There are "no immediate regulatory plans," he added.

A Car's New Job: Checking Its Own Tires

DRIVERS aren't doing it for themselves, so the government plans to reassign the job of checking tire pressures. The cars will do it. The proposal for a new regulation, issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on Sept. 15, would require new cars and trucks weighing less than 10,000 pounds to have systems that monitor tire inflation and warn the driver when the pressure is 25 percent below the automaker's recommendation. Installation would begin with the 2006 model year and the monitors would be required on all new cars by 2008. More than a quarter of all cars and trucks on the road in the United States have at least one substantially underinflated tire - defined as 8 or more pounds per square inch below the recommended pressure - according to a government study.

Underinflation is a serious safety hazard; the rollover crashes of Ford Explorer S.U.V.'s in the 1990's were attributed partly to tires that overheated and failed because of low pressure. Tires with insufficient air pressure also impair handling, hurt fuel economy and wear unevenly. Tire makers suggest checking air pressure at least once a month, just before long trips and whenever the car will carry extra loads. About 10 percent of new vehicles sold in the United States today have pressure monitors, either as standard equipment or as an extra-cost option. Among other applications, the monitoring systems are needed in vehicles that use "run flat" tires, a type that can be driven even after a puncture has allowed all the air to escape. High-performance sports cars like the Chevrolet Corvette and Dodge Viper use run-flat tires to eliminate the need for a bulky spare.

Monitors are also available for use in existing cars, trucks, recreational vehicles and motorcycles from tire retailers and accessory companies. Such systems cost about $200 to $400, plus installation of the sensors and receiver unit.

The regulations originally proposed by the safety administration allowed a choice between two monitor types, either direct- or indirect-reading. Indirect systems work by comparing the relative turning speeds of the wheels, using data that are collected by sensors for the antilock brakes. When one tire softens enough to reduce its diameter, making it turn faster than the others, the driver is alerted by a light on the dashboard. The indirect system is simple and inexpensive, and it needs no additional sensors or batteries in the wheels, but it is also less informative: no warning is sent until one tire is at least 20 percent low. Nor can the system report which tire needs air. And because it works only when the tires are rolling, it cannot issue a warning when the car is standing still.

Direct-reading monitors have pressure sensors inside each tire, attached to the valve stem or the wheel - or, in the case of Tire IQ, a system being developed by Goodyear and Siemens, an electronics supplier, built into the tire itself. The sensors measure the actual pressure and transmit the information by radio signal to a display. In response to widespread criticism and court rulings, the government's revised proposal allows only direct-reading pressure monitors. The safety administration estimates the systems will add about $70 to the cost of each new vehicle.

In early systems, pressure sensors had to be moved from wheel to wheel when tires were rotated; later designs can be reprogrammed for the wheels' new locations or even sense them automatically. The first direct sensors used small radio transmitters with batteries rated to last 5 to 10 years. Newer passive systems are read by radio-frequency identification devices similar to those in toll payment systems like E-ZPass.